<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div apple-content-edited="true">In that Cannes thread, Pete mentioned,</div><div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; ">Sad to say that I missed Norwegian Wood at the Michigan Theater recently, speaking of.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br></span></blockquote></div><br><div>I was there. I liked it, especially the stunning use of landscape. But what intrigued me the most were the subtitles. The positioning harked back to the talkie era, when there were films that placed subtitles _between_ lovers talking. </div><div><br></div><div>Lovers talking account for about 90 percent of this film, and they're often shot in striking close-up. Tranh often puts the couple on one side of the frame or another, and the subtitler has chosen to follow them back and forth. S/he shortens the lines and places them squarely between the two people. It was a nice, abusive, technique. </div><div><br></div><div>Markus</div></body></html>